About your Search

20130129
20130206
STATION
MSNBC 7
MSNBCW 7
CSPAN 2
LANGUAGE
English 18
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)
, if you can believe it, karl rove, the architect of the debokle. the valerie wilson affair. last and not least, bush's brain with neither honor nor irony. well, this same karl rove has just declared plans to keep the republican party what he and she wants to do, vote for the most right wing candidate in site. bush's brain is now mocking the republican brain with his announcement that henceforth he, not those primary caucus voters will select the best candidates for senate and other high offices. he, the architect will design the winning republican offering for 2014. what this says is that the mightiest mus in the republican party happens to lost his faith in the party. he and she will throw up more disasters for the voter to reject come next november. more aikens and murdochs who has made the grand old party can tillon of calls. who dares to trust rove as a self-styled electoral grand ra jeer. let's hear from howard feinman and joy reed. talk about political cross dressing. he's going from being the master of disaster by making sure henceforth, those frisky little voters aren't g
consumers and voters. >> cenk: they're supposed to protect them but this has failed. karl rove started a new super pac called conservative victory fund. is there an ongoing battle for the heart of the g.o.p.? >> there is a huge battle right now. it's unclear how it's going to play out. you've got two sides of the republican party neither of which have taken away very different lessons from 2012. the far right thinks it was the moderate and the republican party who caused the republicans to lose the presidential election. and then you've got the moderates now more of the centrists represented by karl rove who think it was the extreme right to caused the party to lose. when you have two sides that don't take away the same lesson from an event, it's hard to reconcile and decide who is going to win in the end. >> john: and the right and moderates see eye to eye. but between mccain and romney, they have not been popular with republican independent voters either. is there a third option for the g.o.p.? >> there are different ways to characterize romney and mccain. one is to characterize them as mo
's going to vote on chuck hagel but he opposes a filibuster for chuck hagel and karl rove is forming yet another super pac to take on fellow republicans. would you buy a used car from this man? i don't think so. why anybody would trust him with a dime after he blew $400 million the last time around. we'll also take a look at president obama yesterday in minneapolis saying people have to decide do they stand with cops or kids. all of that coming up right here on current tv. >> nine. >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way inside. (vo) from the underworld, to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. stop looking at car interiors. get inspired by other stuff. yep. yep. ok. sure. why not? woah. touchscreens. put that in your dash. now, luxury stuff. make your seats like that. that thing has wifi, why doesn't your car? you can't do that. ignore that guy. give it wifi.
connected, of course, with karl rove and the others who are very active in the last election cycle. what do you try to fix? what is the problem -- the republican problem you're trying to correct? >> our goal is to basically trying to institutionalize the william f. buckley rule when he said that the goal should be to try to nominate the most conservative candidate who can win, and that's going to be different in each individual state, but we saw looking back at this last cycle was some significant candidate quality problems. some of the mainstream candidates were like that. we had some really segment self-destructive candidates who ended up impacting ordinaries on the ballot too, like todd akin in missouri and richard murdock in indiana. our goal is to see if we can try to find those candidates who are going to be discipline and can raise the money and be competitive in a general election. >> is iowa one of your top priorities snou in. >> i think almost any race where we see an opportunity either to compete for an open seat or go after an incumbent in a red state, and there are a number of
see the story in the "new york times" today about karl rove's new pact that's basically devoted to fighting the tea party. that to me shows you at least see a big institutional shift among the republican establishment or the republican establishment sort of strikes pack. >> yeah. let me read from that. this is a report saying looking to protect senate races from tea party candidates. you can count i think six or seven winnable races in the last two cycles that have been booted away. i remember watching on election night a matching mitch mcconnell tloes throwing his bourbon across the room because he keeps being denied a short at majority leader because you've had people like christine o'donnell and todd akin and all these people. the biggest done yours of the republican party are looking to protect challenges by far right conservatives and tea party enthusiasts who republicans work could compromise the party's efforts to win control of the senate. >> you basically have karl rove and all these donors working to head off the nomination of steve king. >> steve king being extremely
much worse than the democratic super pacs in the last election cycle. karl rove's american crossroads had a 1.29% return on investment, spending $104 million. compare it to the house majority pac's 70% success rate on $30 million. another democratic super pac, majority pac is what it was called, had an even higher success rate. democratic super pacs did better in the last election because basically, they had a better message, with policies people actually cared about. it seems to me the republican super pacs were all based on a power grab. they had more money. but the money is meant to protect those at the very top. the wealthy. it's power versus populism. and this time around i think we did pretty well. i guess we could say that the citizens united beat citizens united based on where people were. but president obama's remarks three years ago are so true to this day. >> last week the supreme court reversed a century of law that i believe will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections. >> to spend without limit in
in the schools, fixing the mental health system, computerizing the records of those mentally adjudicated. karl rove we can convince some of these companies -- i am not talking about the first amendment -- to stop putting out the violent video games and finally, we need to enforce the reasonable gun laws on but books that the nra supports. >> can i take that as a yes? >> yes, that is a yes. we have 11,000 policemen -- >> can i invite and urge you to advocate the responsible gun owners and i thank them for being responsible gun owners, also joined in the sense of promise? >> there is not a law-abiding firearms owner across the united states that was not torn to pieces by what happened in sandy ". -- hook. they just don't believe their constitutional right to own a firearm and the fact they can protect their family with a firearm results and the problem. >> you and i agree there should be more prosecution of illegal gun possession and illegal gun ownership. >> i have been on this capitol hill for 20 some years agree to that and nobody does it and that's the problem. i will make you a bed right no
was that the message beat the money. we were dramatically outspent by karl rove and big polluters. we had the public on our side. voters wanted leaders who confront the challenge of climate change. we saw attacks on senators in montana and ohio on their energy policies. we saw attacks from mitt romney, heather wilson in new mexico. those attacks proved unseccessful. the omney -- money spent on the affiliated crossroads organization -- the millions that was spent was spent on winning races. you contrast that with the record i'm sharing with you today our organization 83% of the money we spent was on winning races. one great example of that was in massachusetts where we ran accountability ads on scott brown on his environmental record and ties to the big oil companies both taking money on an campaign side and voting for taxpayer handouts to those industries that are making near record profits at the pump. pre and post polling from those ads showed that his record dropped among independent a shocking 21%. so i offer that as an anecdote of powerful the ties are in terms of public mind of who they trust
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)